Honest Question: Whats more Closed-Minded?

Premeer
Premeer Members Posts: 2,946 ✭✭✭✭✭
believing something you cant see?

or ONLY believing what you can see, touch, and feel?
«13

Comments

  • beenwize
    beenwize Members Posts: 2,024 ✭✭
    believing only what's been given to you by the powers that be.
  • Premeer
    Premeer Members Posts: 2,946 ✭✭✭✭✭
    beenwize wrote: »
    believing only what's been given to you by the powers that be.
    so whats more closed minded?

    believing in what you cant see?

    or ONLY believing what you can see touch or feel?
  • Gold_Certificate
    Gold_Certificate Members Posts: 13,228 ✭✭✭✭✭
    Neither. As they are too vague to form an overall summary about how "open" or "closed" a person's mind is.
  • Premeer
    Premeer Members Posts: 2,946 ✭✭✭✭✭
    Neither. As they are too vague to form an overall summary about how "open" or "closed" a person's mind is.
    great way to nullify the simple question. i see you proceeding with caution. trying to avoid ethering your whole self-belief system.

    but you already know the answer to the question. ill keep that between me and you.
    @gold_certificate
  • Gold_Certificate
    Gold_Certificate Members Posts: 13,228 ✭✭✭✭✭
    edited November 2013
    Premeer wrote: »
    Neither. As they are too vague to form an overall summary about how "open" or "closed" a person's mind is.
    great way to nullify the simple question. i see you proceeding with caution. trying to avoid ethering your whole self-belief system.

    but you already know the answer to the question. ill keep that between me and you.
    @gold_certificate
    Your question lacks details. It's like asking "What's worse: eating soup or a sandwich?".

    Depends on what's in the soup/sandwich, how often they are eaten, and the person's reason for eating them.

    In fact, it'd be rather close-minded of me to make a presumption with such little information.
  • Premeer
    Premeer Members Posts: 2,946 ✭✭✭✭✭
    Premeer wrote: »
    Neither. As they are too vague to form an overall summary about how "open" or "closed" a person's mind is.
    great way to nullify the simple question. i see you proceeding with caution. trying to avoid ethering your whole self-belief system.

    but you already know the answer to the question. ill keep that between me and you.
    @gold_certificate
    Your question lacks details. It's like asking "What's worse: eating soup or a sandwich?".

    Depends on what's in the soup/sandwich, how often they are eaten, and the person's reason for eating them.

    In fact, it'd be rather close-minded of me to make a presumption with such little information.

    the question doesnt need details. it covers EVERYTHING.

    but again, you are trying really hard at self-ethering your whole belief system. you already know what this is about.. its not a secret and you are not dumb. so you tip-toeing around here is funny.
  • Gold_Certificate
    Gold_Certificate Members Posts: 13,228 ✭✭✭✭✭
    Premeer wrote: »
    Premeer wrote: »
    Neither. As they are too vague to form an overall summary about how "open" or "closed" a person's mind is.
    great way to nullify the simple question. i see you proceeding with caution. trying to avoid ethering your whole self-belief system.

    but you already know the answer to the question. ill keep that between me and you.
    @gold_certificate
    Your question lacks details. It's like asking "What's worse: eating soup or a sandwich?".

    Depends on what's in the soup/sandwich, how often they are eaten, and the person's reason for eating them.

    In fact, it'd be rather close-minded of me to make a presumption with such little information.

    the question doesnt need details. it covers EVERYTHING.

    but again, you are trying really hard at self-ethering your whole belief system. you already know what this is about.. its not a secret and you are not dumb. so you tip-toeing around here is funny.
    Covering everything is precisely why I said it's too vague.

    I'm am not close-minded enough to presume I can make a determination regarding every possible scenario that fits the two premises you proposed.
  • Premeer
    Premeer Members Posts: 2,946 ✭✭✭✭✭
    Premeer wrote: »
    Premeer wrote: »
    Neither. As they are too vague to form an overall summary about how "open" or "closed" a person's mind is.
    great way to nullify the simple question. i see you proceeding with caution. trying to avoid ethering your whole self-belief system.

    but you already know the answer to the question. ill keep that between me and you.
    @gold_certificate
    Your question lacks details. It's like asking "What's worse: eating soup or a sandwich?".

    Depends on what's in the soup/sandwich, how often they are eaten, and the person's reason for eating them.

    In fact, it'd be rather close-minded of me to make a presumption with such little information.

    the question doesnt need details. it covers EVERYTHING.

    but again, you are trying really hard at self-ethering your whole belief system. you already know what this is about.. its not a secret and you are not dumb. so you tip-toeing around here is funny.
    Covering everything is precisely why I said it's too vague.

    I'm am not close-minded enough to presume I can make a determination regarding every possible scenario that fits the two premises you proposed.

    we all know you are a atheist.. and we all know you wont answer the question logically cuz you wont ether yourself..

    its not even logical to strictly believe only what you can see, touch, and feel.

    your whole belief system lacks open-mindedness AND logic.
  • Gold_Certificate
    Gold_Certificate Members Posts: 13,228 ✭✭✭✭✭
    Premeer wrote: »
    Premeer wrote: »
    Premeer wrote: »
    Neither. As they are too vague to form an overall summary about how "open" or "closed" a person's mind is.
    great way to nullify the simple question. i see you proceeding with caution. trying to avoid ethering your whole self-belief system.

    but you already know the answer to the question. ill keep that between me and you.
    @gold_certificate
    Your question lacks details. It's like asking "What's worse: eating soup or a sandwich?".

    Depends on what's in the soup/sandwich, how often they are eaten, and the person's reason for eating them.

    In fact, it'd be rather close-minded of me to make a presumption with such little information.

    the question doesnt need details. it covers EVERYTHING.

    but again, you are trying really hard at self-ethering your whole belief system. you already know what this is about.. its not a secret and you are not dumb. so you tip-toeing around here is funny.
    Covering everything is precisely why I said it's too vague.

    I'm am not close-minded enough to presume I can make a determination regarding every possible scenario that fits the two premises you proposed.

    we all know you are a atheist.. and we all know you wont answer the question logically cuz you wont ether yourself..

    its not even logical to strictly believe only what you can see, touch, and feel.

    your whole belief system lacks open-mindedness AND logic.
    You seem to be making the incorrect assumption that I only believe what I "can see, touch, and feel" and that it somehow relates to me being an atheist.

    I can't "see, touch, and feel" radio waves, but I certainly believe they exist.
  • Premeer
    Premeer Members Posts: 2,946 ✭✭✭✭✭
    edited November 2013
    Premeer wrote: »
    Premeer wrote: »
    Premeer wrote: »
    Neither. As they are too vague to form an overall summary about how "open" or "closed" a person's mind is.
    great way to nullify the simple question. i see you proceeding with caution. trying to avoid ethering your whole self-belief system.

    but you already know the answer to the question. ill keep that between me and you.
    @gold_certificate
    Your question lacks details. It's like asking "What's worse: eating soup or a sandwich?".

    Depends on what's in the soup/sandwich, how often they are eaten, and the person's reason for eating them.

    In fact, it'd be rather close-minded of me to make a presumption with such little information.

    the question doesnt need details. it covers EVERYTHING.

    but again, you are trying really hard at self-ethering your whole belief system. you already know what this is about.. its not a secret and you are not dumb. so you tip-toeing around here is funny.
    Covering everything is precisely why I said it's too vague.

    I'm am not close-minded enough to presume I can make a determination regarding every possible scenario that fits the two premises you proposed.

    we all know you are a atheist.. and we all know you wont answer the question logically cuz you wont ether yourself..

    its not even logical to strictly believe only what you can see, touch, and feel.

    your whole belief system lacks open-mindedness AND logic.
    You seem to be making the incorrect assumption that I only believe what I "can see, touch, and feel" and that it somehow relates to me being an atheist.

    I can't "see, touch, and feel" radio waves, but I certainly believe they exist.

    dont be ridiculous. you cant see cells either with your naked eye.. cant see wifi either. so your ridiculousness is almost non-tolerable.
  • Gold_Certificate
    Gold_Certificate Members Posts: 13,228 ✭✭✭✭✭
    Premeer wrote: »
    Premeer wrote: »
    Premeer wrote: »
    Premeer wrote: »
    Neither. As they are too vague to form an overall summary about how "open" or "closed" a person's mind is.
    great way to nullify the simple question. i see you proceeding with caution. trying to avoid ethering your whole self-belief system.

    but you already know the answer to the question. ill keep that between me and you.
    @gold_certificate
    Your question lacks details. It's like asking "What's worse: eating soup or a sandwich?".

    Depends on what's in the soup/sandwich, how often they are eaten, and the person's reason for eating them.

    In fact, it'd be rather close-minded of me to make a presumption with such little information.

    the question doesnt need details. it covers EVERYTHING.

    but again, you are trying really hard at self-ethering your whole belief system. you already know what this is about.. its not a secret and you are not dumb. so you tip-toeing around here is funny.
    Covering everything is precisely why I said it's too vague.

    I'm am not close-minded enough to presume I can make a determination regarding every possible scenario that fits the two premises you proposed.

    we all know you are a atheist.. and we all know you wont answer the question logically cuz you wont ether yourself..

    its not even logical to strictly believe only what you can see, touch, and feel.

    your whole belief system lacks open-mindedness AND logic.
    You seem to be making the incorrect assumption that I only believe what I "can see, touch, and feel" and that it somehow relates to me being an atheist.

    I can't "see, touch, and feel" radio waves, but I certainly believe they exist.

    dont be ridiculous. you cant see cells either with your naked eye.. cant see wifi either. so your ridiculousness is almost non-tolerable.
    It depends on the cell, they can be as large as an ostrich egg; which are definitely visible.

    And WiFi is a type of radio wave; which I already said I believe in, despite being unable to see them.
    ...I can't "see, touch, and feel" radio waves, but I certainly believe they exist.
  • Premeer
    Premeer Members Posts: 2,946 ✭✭✭✭✭
    Premeer wrote: »
    Premeer wrote: »
    Premeer wrote: »
    Premeer wrote: »
    Neither. As they are too vague to form an overall summary about how "open" or "closed" a person's mind is.
    great way to nullify the simple question. i see you proceeding with caution. trying to avoid ethering your whole self-belief system.

    but you already know the answer to the question. ill keep that between me and you.
    @gold_certificate
    Your question lacks details. It's like asking "What's worse: eating soup or a sandwich?".

    Depends on what's in the soup/sandwich, how often they are eaten, and the person's reason for eating them.

    In fact, it'd be rather close-minded of me to make a presumption with such little information.

    the question doesnt need details. it covers EVERYTHING.

    but again, you are trying really hard at self-ethering your whole belief system. you already know what this is about.. its not a secret and you are not dumb. so you tip-toeing around here is funny.
    Covering everything is precisely why I said it's too vague.

    I'm am not close-minded enough to presume I can make a determination regarding every possible scenario that fits the two premises you proposed.

    we all know you are a atheist.. and we all know you wont answer the question logically cuz you wont ether yourself..

    its not even logical to strictly believe only what you can see, touch, and feel.

    your whole belief system lacks open-mindedness AND logic.
    You seem to be making the incorrect assumption that I only believe what I "can see, touch, and feel" and that it somehow relates to me being an atheist.

    I can't "see, touch, and feel" radio waves, but I certainly believe they exist.

    dont be ridiculous. you cant see cells either with your naked eye.. cant see wifi either. so your ridiculousness is almost non-tolerable.
    It depends on the cell, they can be as large as an ostrich egg; which are definitely visible.

    And WiFi is a type of radio wave; which I already said I believe in, despite being unable to see them.
    ...I can't "see, touch, and feel" radio waves, but I certainly believe they exist.

    you believe wifi cuz you see with your own eyes the benefits of it.. so that example is null and void.

    same as cells.. because you can see them with your eye.. 1 way or another...

    which was the points that you clearly missed.
  • Gold_Certificate
    Gold_Certificate Members Posts: 13,228 ✭✭✭✭✭
    Premeer wrote: »
    Premeer wrote: »
    Premeer wrote: »
    Premeer wrote: »
    Premeer wrote: »
    Neither. As they are too vague to form an overall summary about how "open" or "closed" a person's mind is.
    great way to nullify the simple question. i see you proceeding with caution. trying to avoid ethering your whole self-belief system.

    but you already know the answer to the question. ill keep that between me and you.
    @gold_certificate
    Your question lacks details. It's like asking "What's worse: eating soup or a sandwich?".

    Depends on what's in the soup/sandwich, how often they are eaten, and the person's reason for eating them.

    In fact, it'd be rather close-minded of me to make a presumption with such little information.

    the question doesnt need details. it covers EVERYTHING.

    but again, you are trying really hard at self-ethering your whole belief system. you already know what this is about.. its not a secret and you are not dumb. so you tip-toeing around here is funny.
    Covering everything is precisely why I said it's too vague.

    I'm am not close-minded enough to presume I can make a determination regarding every possible scenario that fits the two premises you proposed.

    we all know you are a atheist.. and we all know you wont answer the question logically cuz you wont ether yourself..

    its not even logical to strictly believe only what you can see, touch, and feel.

    your whole belief system lacks open-mindedness AND logic.
    You seem to be making the incorrect assumption that I only believe what I "can see, touch, and feel" and that it somehow relates to me being an atheist.

    I can't "see, touch, and feel" radio waves, but I certainly believe they exist.

    dont be ridiculous. you cant see cells either with your naked eye.. cant see wifi either. so your ridiculousness is almost non-tolerable.
    It depends on the cell, they can be as large as an ostrich egg; which are definitely visible.

    And WiFi is a type of radio wave; which I already said I believe in, despite being unable to see them.
    ...I can't "see, touch, and feel" radio waves, but I certainly believe they exist.

    you believe wifi cuz you see with your own eyes the benefits of it.. so that example is null and void.

    same as cells.. because you can see them with your eye.. 1 way or another...

    which was the points that you clearly missed.
    You said "strictly believe only what you can see, touch, and feel"; WiFi and other radio waves do not fall under this category, yet I still believe in them.

    You're the one who brought up cells; I was just correcting your claim that they could not be seen with the naked eye, since it was not entirely true.
  • Premeer
    Premeer Members Posts: 2,946 ✭✭✭✭✭
    Premeer wrote: »
    Premeer wrote: »
    Premeer wrote: »
    Premeer wrote: »
    Premeer wrote: »
    Neither. As they are too vague to form an overall summary about how "open" or "closed" a person's mind is.
    great way to nullify the simple question. i see you proceeding with caution. trying to avoid ethering your whole self-belief system.

    but you already know the answer to the question. ill keep that between me and you.
    @gold_certificate
    Your question lacks details. It's like asking "What's worse: eating soup or a sandwich?".

    Depends on what's in the soup/sandwich, how often they are eaten, and the person's reason for eating them.

    In fact, it'd be rather close-minded of me to make a presumption with such little information.

    the question doesnt need details. it covers EVERYTHING.

    but again, you are trying really hard at self-ethering your whole belief system. you already know what this is about.. its not a secret and you are not dumb. so you tip-toeing around here is funny.
    Covering everything is precisely why I said it's too vague.

    I'm am not close-minded enough to presume I can make a determination regarding every possible scenario that fits the two premises you proposed.

    we all know you are a atheist.. and we all know you wont answer the question logically cuz you wont ether yourself..

    its not even logical to strictly believe only what you can see, touch, and feel.

    your whole belief system lacks open-mindedness AND logic.
    You seem to be making the incorrect assumption that I only believe what I "can see, touch, and feel" and that it somehow relates to me being an atheist.

    I can't "see, touch, and feel" radio waves, but I certainly believe they exist.

    dont be ridiculous. you cant see cells either with your naked eye.. cant see wifi either. so your ridiculousness is almost non-tolerable.
    It depends on the cell, they can be as large as an ostrich egg; which are definitely visible.

    And WiFi is a type of radio wave; which I already said I believe in, despite being unable to see them.
    ...I can't "see, touch, and feel" radio waves, but I certainly believe they exist.

    you believe wifi cuz you see with your own eyes the benefits of it.. so that example is null and void.

    same as cells.. because you can see them with your eye.. 1 way or another...

    which was the points that you clearly missed.
    You said "strictly believe only what you can see, touch, and feel"; WiFi and other radio waves do not fall under this category, yet I still believe in them.

    You're the one who brought up cells; I was just correcting your claim that they could not be seen with the naked eye, since it was not entirely true.
    your "technicality" is getting ridiculous. i rather not spell everything out and make the ABCs more complicated than they are.
  • Gold_Certificate
    Gold_Certificate Members Posts: 13,228 ✭✭✭✭✭
    Premeer wrote: »
    Premeer wrote: »
    Premeer wrote: »
    Premeer wrote: »
    Premeer wrote: »
    Premeer wrote: »
    Neither. As they are too vague to form an overall summary about how "open" or "closed" a person's mind is.
    great way to nullify the simple question. i see you proceeding with caution. trying to avoid ethering your whole self-belief system.

    but you already know the answer to the question. ill keep that between me and you.
    @gold_certificate
    Your question lacks details. It's like asking "What's worse: eating soup or a sandwich?".

    Depends on what's in the soup/sandwich, how often they are eaten, and the person's reason for eating them.

    In fact, it'd be rather close-minded of me to make a presumption with such little information.

    the question doesnt need details. it covers EVERYTHING.

    but again, you are trying really hard at self-ethering your whole belief system. you already know what this is about.. its not a secret and you are not dumb. so you tip-toeing around here is funny.
    Covering everything is precisely why I said it's too vague.

    I'm am not close-minded enough to presume I can make a determination regarding every possible scenario that fits the two premises you proposed.

    we all know you are a atheist.. and we all know you wont answer the question logically cuz you wont ether yourself..

    its not even logical to strictly believe only what you can see, touch, and feel.

    your whole belief system lacks open-mindedness AND logic.
    You seem to be making the incorrect assumption that I only believe what I "can see, touch, and feel" and that it somehow relates to me being an atheist.

    I can't "see, touch, and feel" radio waves, but I certainly believe they exist.

    dont be ridiculous. you cant see cells either with your naked eye.. cant see wifi either. so your ridiculousness is almost non-tolerable.
    It depends on the cell, they can be as large as an ostrich egg; which are definitely visible.

    And WiFi is a type of radio wave; which I already said I believe in, despite being unable to see them.
    ...I can't "see, touch, and feel" radio waves, but I certainly believe they exist.

    you believe wifi cuz you see with your own eyes the benefits of it.. so that example is null and void.

    same as cells.. because you can see them with your eye.. 1 way or another...

    which was the points that you clearly missed.
    You said "strictly believe only what you can see, touch, and feel"; WiFi and other radio waves do not fall under this category, yet I still believe in them.

    You're the one who brought up cells; I was just correcting your claim that they could not be seen with the naked eye, since it was not entirely true.
    your "technicality" is getting ridiculous. i rather not spell everything out and make the ABCs more complicated than they are.
    You came up what the question, not me.
    Premeer wrote: »
    believing something you cant see?

    or ONLY believing what you can see, touch, and feel?

    I happen to believe in plenty of things that I can't "see, touch, and feel", despite being an atheist.

    Perhaps you should've been more specific if you were referring to something other than what you wrote.
  • Premeer
    Premeer Members Posts: 2,946 ✭✭✭✭✭
    Premeer wrote: »
    Premeer wrote: »
    Premeer wrote: »
    Premeer wrote: »
    Premeer wrote: »
    Premeer wrote: »
    Neither. As they are too vague to form an overall summary about how "open" or "closed" a person's mind is.
    great way to nullify the simple question. i see you proceeding with caution. trying to avoid ethering your whole self-belief system.

    but you already know the answer to the question. ill keep that between me and you.
    @gold_certificate
    Your question lacks details. It's like asking "What's worse: eating soup or a sandwich?".

    Depends on what's in the soup/sandwich, how often they are eaten, and the person's reason for eating them.

    In fact, it'd be rather close-minded of me to make a presumption with such little information.

    the question doesnt need details. it covers EVERYTHING.

    but again, you are trying really hard at self-ethering your whole belief system. you already know what this is about.. its not a secret and you are not dumb. so you tip-toeing around here is funny.
    Covering everything is precisely why I said it's too vague.

    I'm am not close-minded enough to presume I can make a determination regarding every possible scenario that fits the two premises you proposed.

    we all know you are a atheist.. and we all know you wont answer the question logically cuz you wont ether yourself..

    its not even logical to strictly believe only what you can see, touch, and feel.

    your whole belief system lacks open-mindedness AND logic.
    You seem to be making the incorrect assumption that I only believe what I "can see, touch, and feel" and that it somehow relates to me being an atheist.

    I can't "see, touch, and feel" radio waves, but I certainly believe they exist.

    dont be ridiculous. you cant see cells either with your naked eye.. cant see wifi either. so your ridiculousness is almost non-tolerable.
    It depends on the cell, they can be as large as an ostrich egg; which are definitely visible.

    And WiFi is a type of radio wave; which I already said I believe in, despite being unable to see them.
    ...I can't "see, touch, and feel" radio waves, but I certainly believe they exist.

    you believe wifi cuz you see with your own eyes the benefits of it.. so that example is null and void.

    same as cells.. because you can see them with your eye.. 1 way or another...

    which was the points that you clearly missed.
    You said "strictly believe only what you can see, touch, and feel"; WiFi and other radio waves do not fall under this category, yet I still believe in them.

    You're the one who brought up cells; I was just correcting your claim that they could not be seen with the naked eye, since it was not entirely true.
    your "technicality" is getting ridiculous. i rather not spell everything out and make the ABCs more complicated than they are.
    You came up what the question, not me.
    Premeer wrote: »
    believing something you cant see?

    or ONLY believing what you can see, touch, and feel?

    I happen to believe in plenty of things that I can't "see, touch, and feel", despite being an atheist.

    Perhaps you should've been more specific if you were referring to something other than what you wrote.

    perhaps, you should have answered the simple question with a simple answer.
    you so smart that you became dumb in the same breath.
  • Gold_Certificate
    Gold_Certificate Members Posts: 13,228 ✭✭✭✭✭
    Premeer wrote: »
    Premeer wrote: »
    Premeer wrote: »
    Premeer wrote: »
    Premeer wrote: »
    Premeer wrote: »
    Premeer wrote: »
    Neither. As they are too vague to form an overall summary about how "open" or "closed" a person's mind is.
    great way to nullify the simple question. i see you proceeding with caution. trying to avoid ethering your whole self-belief system.

    but you already know the answer to the question. ill keep that between me and you.
    @gold_certificate
    Your question lacks details. It's like asking "What's worse: eating soup or a sandwich?".

    Depends on what's in the soup/sandwich, how often they are eaten, and the person's reason for eating them.

    In fact, it'd be rather close-minded of me to make a presumption with such little information.

    the question doesnt need details. it covers EVERYTHING.

    but again, you are trying really hard at self-ethering your whole belief system. you already know what this is about.. its not a secret and you are not dumb. so you tip-toeing around here is funny.
    Covering everything is precisely why I said it's too vague.

    I'm am not close-minded enough to presume I can make a determination regarding every possible scenario that fits the two premises you proposed.

    we all know you are a atheist.. and we all know you wont answer the question logically cuz you wont ether yourself..

    its not even logical to strictly believe only what you can see, touch, and feel.

    your whole belief system lacks open-mindedness AND logic.
    You seem to be making the incorrect assumption that I only believe what I "can see, touch, and feel" and that it somehow relates to me being an atheist.

    I can't "see, touch, and feel" radio waves, but I certainly believe they exist.

    dont be ridiculous. you cant see cells either with your naked eye.. cant see wifi either. so your ridiculousness is almost non-tolerable.
    It depends on the cell, they can be as large as an ostrich egg; which are definitely visible.

    And WiFi is a type of radio wave; which I already said I believe in, despite being unable to see them.
    ...I can't "see, touch, and feel" radio waves, but I certainly believe they exist.

    you believe wifi cuz you see with your own eyes the benefits of it.. so that example is null and void.

    same as cells.. because you can see them with your eye.. 1 way or another...

    which was the points that you clearly missed.
    You said "strictly believe only what you can see, touch, and feel"; WiFi and other radio waves do not fall under this category, yet I still believe in them.

    You're the one who brought up cells; I was just correcting your claim that they could not be seen with the naked eye, since it was not entirely true.
    your "technicality" is getting ridiculous. i rather not spell everything out and make the ABCs more complicated than they are.
    You came up what the question, not me.
    Premeer wrote: »
    believing something you cant see?

    or ONLY believing what you can see, touch, and feel?

    I happen to believe in plenty of things that I can't "see, touch, and feel", despite being an atheist.

    Perhaps you should've been more specific if you were referring to something other than what you wrote.

    perhaps, you should have answered the simple question with a simple answer.
    you so smart that you became dumb in the same breath.
    I did give you a simple answer.
    Neither.
  • Premeer
    Premeer Members Posts: 2,946 ✭✭✭✭✭
    Premeer wrote: »
    Premeer wrote: »
    Premeer wrote: »
    Premeer wrote: »
    Premeer wrote: »
    Premeer wrote: »
    Premeer wrote: »
    Neither. As they are too vague to form an overall summary about how "open" or "closed" a person's mind is.
    great way to nullify the simple question. i see you proceeding with caution. trying to avoid ethering your whole self-belief system.

    but you already know the answer to the question. ill keep that between me and you.
    @gold_certificate
    Your question lacks details. It's like asking "What's worse: eating soup or a sandwich?".

    Depends on what's in the soup/sandwich, how often they are eaten, and the person's reason for eating them.

    In fact, it'd be rather close-minded of me to make a presumption with such little information.

    the question doesnt need details. it covers EVERYTHING.

    but again, you are trying really hard at self-ethering your whole belief system. you already know what this is about.. its not a secret and you are not dumb. so you tip-toeing around here is funny.
    Covering everything is precisely why I said it's too vague.

    I'm am not close-minded enough to presume I can make a determination regarding every possible scenario that fits the two premises you proposed.

    we all know you are a atheist.. and we all know you wont answer the question logically cuz you wont ether yourself..

    its not even logical to strictly believe only what you can see, touch, and feel.

    your whole belief system lacks open-mindedness AND logic.
    You seem to be making the incorrect assumption that I only believe what I "can see, touch, and feel" and that it somehow relates to me being an atheist.

    I can't "see, touch, and feel" radio waves, but I certainly believe they exist.

    dont be ridiculous. you cant see cells either with your naked eye.. cant see wifi either. so your ridiculousness is almost non-tolerable.
    It depends on the cell, they can be as large as an ostrich egg; which are definitely visible.

    And WiFi is a type of radio wave; which I already said I believe in, despite being unable to see them.
    ...I can't "see, touch, and feel" radio waves, but I certainly believe they exist.

    you believe wifi cuz you see with your own eyes the benefits of it.. so that example is null and void.

    same as cells.. because you can see them with your eye.. 1 way or another...

    which was the points that you clearly missed.
    You said "strictly believe only what you can see, touch, and feel"; WiFi and other radio waves do not fall under this category, yet I still believe in them.

    You're the one who brought up cells; I was just correcting your claim that they could not be seen with the naked eye, since it was not entirely true.
    your "technicality" is getting ridiculous. i rather not spell everything out and make the ABCs more complicated than they are.
    You came up what the question, not me.
    Premeer wrote: »
    believing something you cant see?

    or ONLY believing what you can see, touch, and feel?

    I happen to believe in plenty of things that I can't "see, touch, and feel", despite being an atheist.

    Perhaps you should've been more specific if you were referring to something other than what you wrote.

    perhaps, you should have answered the simple question with a simple answer.
    you so smart that you became dumb in the same breath.
    I did give you a simple answer.
    Neither.
    obviously, thats not a answer pertaining to the question.
  • Gold_Certificate
    Gold_Certificate Members Posts: 13,228 ✭✭✭✭✭
    edited November 2013
    Premeer wrote: »
    Premeer wrote: »
    Premeer wrote: »
    Premeer wrote: »
    Premeer wrote: »
    Premeer wrote: »
    Premeer wrote: »
    Premeer wrote: »
    Neither. As they are too vague to form an overall summary about how "open" or "closed" a person's mind is.
    great way to nullify the simple question. i see you proceeding with caution. trying to avoid ethering your whole self-belief system.

    but you already know the answer to the question. ill keep that between me and you.
    @gold_certificate
    Your question lacks details. It's like asking "What's worse: eating soup or a sandwich?".

    Depends on what's in the soup/sandwich, how often they are eaten, and the person's reason for eating them.

    In fact, it'd be rather close-minded of me to make a presumption with such little information.

    the question doesnt need details. it covers EVERYTHING.

    but again, you are trying really hard at self-ethering your whole belief system. you already know what this is about.. its not a secret and you are not dumb. so you tip-toeing around here is funny.
    Covering everything is precisely why I said it's too vague.

    I'm am not close-minded enough to presume I can make a determination regarding every possible scenario that fits the two premises you proposed.

    we all know you are a atheist.. and we all know you wont answer the question logically cuz you wont ether yourself..

    its not even logical to strictly believe only what you can see, touch, and feel.

    your whole belief system lacks open-mindedness AND logic.
    You seem to be making the incorrect assumption that I only believe what I "can see, touch, and feel" and that it somehow relates to me being an atheist.

    I can't "see, touch, and feel" radio waves, but I certainly believe they exist.

    dont be ridiculous. you cant see cells either with your naked eye.. cant see wifi either. so your ridiculousness is almost non-tolerable.
    It depends on the cell, they can be as large as an ostrich egg; which are definitely visible.

    And WiFi is a type of radio wave; which I already said I believe in, despite being unable to see them.
    ...I can't "see, touch, and feel" radio waves, but I certainly believe they exist.

    you believe wifi cuz you see with your own eyes the benefits of it.. so that example is null and void.

    same as cells.. because you can see them with your eye.. 1 way or another...

    which was the points that you clearly missed.
    You said "strictly believe only what you can see, touch, and feel"; WiFi and other radio waves do not fall under this category, yet I still believe in them.

    You're the one who brought up cells; I was just correcting your claim that they could not be seen with the naked eye, since it was not entirely true.
    your "technicality" is getting ridiculous. i rather not spell everything out and make the ABCs more complicated than they are.
    You came up what the question, not me.
    Premeer wrote: »
    believing something you cant see?

    or ONLY believing what you can see, touch, and feel?

    I happen to believe in plenty of things that I can't "see, touch, and feel", despite being an atheist.

    Perhaps you should've been more specific if you were referring to something other than what you wrote.

    perhaps, you should have answered the simple question with a simple answer.
    you so smart that you became dumb in the same breath.
    I did give you a simple answer.
    Neither.
    obviously, thats not a answer pertaining to the question.
    You may not like the answer, but it does answer your question.

    You can always ask a different question if you want a different answer. Just make sure it doesn't have the same flaw as the original question.
  • Premeer
    Premeer Members Posts: 2,946 ✭✭✭✭✭
    Premeer wrote: »
    Premeer wrote: »
    Premeer wrote: »
    Premeer wrote: »
    Premeer wrote: »
    Premeer wrote: »
    Premeer wrote: »
    Premeer wrote: »
    Neither. As they are too vague to form an overall summary about how "open" or "closed" a person's mind is.
    great way to nullify the simple question. i see you proceeding with caution. trying to avoid ethering your whole self-belief system.

    but you already know the answer to the question. ill keep that between me and you.
    @gold_certificate
    Your question lacks details. It's like asking "What's worse: eating soup or a sandwich?".

    Depends on what's in the soup/sandwich, how often they are eaten, and the person's reason for eating them.

    In fact, it'd be rather close-minded of me to make a presumption with such little information.

    the question doesnt need details. it covers EVERYTHING.

    but again, you are trying really hard at self-ethering your whole belief system. you already know what this is about.. its not a secret and you are not dumb. so you tip-toeing around here is funny.
    Covering everything is precisely why I said it's too vague.

    I'm am not close-minded enough to presume I can make a determination regarding every possible scenario that fits the two premises you proposed.

    we all know you are a atheist.. and we all know you wont answer the question logically cuz you wont ether yourself..

    its not even logical to strictly believe only what you can see, touch, and feel.

    your whole belief system lacks open-mindedness AND logic.
    You seem to be making the incorrect assumption that I only believe what I "can see, touch, and feel" and that it somehow relates to me being an atheist.

    I can't "see, touch, and feel" radio waves, but I certainly believe they exist.

    dont be ridiculous. you cant see cells either with your naked eye.. cant see wifi either. so your ridiculousness is almost non-tolerable.
    It depends on the cell, they can be as large as an ostrich egg; which are definitely visible.

    And WiFi is a type of radio wave; which I already said I believe in, despite being unable to see them.
    ...I can't "see, touch, and feel" radio waves, but I certainly believe they exist.

    you believe wifi cuz you see with your own eyes the benefits of it.. so that example is null and void.

    same as cells.. because you can see them with your eye.. 1 way or another...

    which was the points that you clearly missed.
    You said "strictly believe only what you can see, touch, and feel"; WiFi and other radio waves do not fall under this category, yet I still believe in them.

    You're the one who brought up cells; I was just correcting your claim that they could not be seen with the naked eye, since it was not entirely true.
    your "technicality" is getting ridiculous. i rather not spell everything out and make the ABCs more complicated than they are.
    You came up what the question, not me.
    Premeer wrote: »
    believing something you cant see?

    or ONLY believing what you can see, touch, and feel?

    I happen to believe in plenty of things that I can't "see, touch, and feel", despite being an atheist.

    Perhaps you should've been more specific if you were referring to something other than what you wrote.

    perhaps, you should have answered the simple question with a simple answer.
    you so smart that you became dumb in the same breath.
    I did give you a simple answer.
    Neither.
    obviously, thats not a answer pertaining to the question.
    You may not like the answer, but it does answer your question.

    You can always ask a different question if you want a different answer. Just make sure it doesn't have the same flaw as the original question.

    you like playing dumb..

    we already went over what this is about... and why you wont answer the obvious question.. for verification, what forum room are we posting in.

    next time, dont play so dumb just to over-complicate a simple obvious question just to try to keep from blowing up your whole belief system.
  • Black Boy King
    Black Boy King Members Posts: 6,984 ✭✭✭✭✭
    Atheists all got something in common I see lmao
  • Gold_Certificate
    Gold_Certificate Members Posts: 13,228 ✭✭✭✭✭
    Premeer wrote: »
    Premeer wrote: »
    Premeer wrote: »
    Premeer wrote: »
    Premeer wrote: »
    Premeer wrote: »
    Premeer wrote: »
    Premeer wrote: »
    Premeer wrote: »
    Neither. As they are too vague to form an overall summary about how "open" or "closed" a person's mind is.
    great way to nullify the simple question. i see you proceeding with caution. trying to avoid ethering your whole self-belief system.

    but you already know the answer to the question. ill keep that between me and you.
    @gold_certificate
    Your question lacks details. It's like asking "What's worse: eating soup or a sandwich?".

    Depends on what's in the soup/sandwich, how often they are eaten, and the person's reason for eating them.

    In fact, it'd be rather close-minded of me to make a presumption with such little information.

    the question doesnt need details. it covers EVERYTHING.

    but again, you are trying really hard at self-ethering your whole belief system. you already know what this is about.. its not a secret and you are not dumb. so you tip-toeing around here is funny.
    Covering everything is precisely why I said it's too vague.

    I'm am not close-minded enough to presume I can make a determination regarding every possible scenario that fits the two premises you proposed.

    we all know you are a atheist.. and we all know you wont answer the question logically cuz you wont ether yourself..

    its not even logical to strictly believe only what you can see, touch, and feel.

    your whole belief system lacks open-mindedness AND logic.
    You seem to be making the incorrect assumption that I only believe what I "can see, touch, and feel" and that it somehow relates to me being an atheist.

    I can't "see, touch, and feel" radio waves, but I certainly believe they exist.

    dont be ridiculous. you cant see cells either with your naked eye.. cant see wifi either. so your ridiculousness is almost non-tolerable.
    It depends on the cell, they can be as large as an ostrich egg; which are definitely visible.

    And WiFi is a type of radio wave; which I already said I believe in, despite being unable to see them.
    ...I can't "see, touch, and feel" radio waves, but I certainly believe they exist.

    you believe wifi cuz you see with your own eyes the benefits of it.. so that example is null and void.

    same as cells.. because you can see them with your eye.. 1 way or another...

    which was the points that you clearly missed.
    You said "strictly believe only what you can see, touch, and feel"; WiFi and other radio waves do not fall under this category, yet I still believe in them.

    You're the one who brought up cells; I was just correcting your claim that they could not be seen with the naked eye, since it was not entirely true.
    your "technicality" is getting ridiculous. i rather not spell everything out and make the ABCs more complicated than they are.
    You came up what the question, not me.
    Premeer wrote: »
    believing something you cant see?

    or ONLY believing what you can see, touch, and feel?

    I happen to believe in plenty of things that I can't "see, touch, and feel", despite being an atheist.

    Perhaps you should've been more specific if you were referring to something other than what you wrote.

    perhaps, you should have answered the simple question with a simple answer.
    you so smart that you became dumb in the same breath.
    I did give you a simple answer.
    Neither.
    obviously, thats not a answer pertaining to the question.
    You may not like the answer, but it does answer your question.

    You can always ask a different question if you want a different answer. Just make sure it doesn't have the same flaw as the original question.

    you like playing dumb..

    we already went over what this is about... and why you wont answer the obvious question.. for verification, what forum room are we posting in.

    next time, dont play so dumb just to over-complicate a simple obvious question just to try to keep from blowing up your whole belief system.
    And I answered that as well:
    I happen to believe in plenty of things that I can't "see, touch, and feel", despite being an atheist.

    You may not have liked the answer, but it was an answer none-the-less.
  • Bodhi
    Bodhi Members Posts: 7,932 ✭✭✭✭✭
    There's a saying: don't be so "open minded" that your brains fall out.
  • Ajackson17
    Ajackson17 Members Posts: 22,501 ✭✭✭✭✭
    Both and neither are both logical
  • Bodhi
    Bodhi Members Posts: 7,932 ✭✭✭✭✭
    Ziryab wrote: »
    Atheists all got something in common I see lmao

    Yeah its called not believing in ?